guildwarsfandomcom-20200222-history
User talk:Gimmethegepgun/Sandbox
__TOC__ Old Talk BoxyRT | Talk 22:20, 11 January 2008 (UTC) :Was using that for redtext (when something is replaced by something else) --Gimmethegepgun 22:22, 11 January 2008 (UTC) Split Skill Box "progression_pvp_0_effect". Argh! PLEASE consider using pvp_progression_0_effect . That will make it possible to use your Sandbox as the display template for my skill stat extraction templates. You'll have succeeded when displays correctly. I'm putting that at the bottom of this page, feel free to delete that there. That said, my templates don't always work correctly, they may not have all attributes yet (especially for the progressions) and they have defined (but empty) attributes that should be undefined. I'm working on it, I'm going to tell you when I think that's fixed. Additionally, you can't use to display based on whether the attribute (pvp_description etc.) is present because it will be there even if it is the same as the non-PvP attribute; test for equality instead. What I can do to help is to test for equality of the stat row stuff (energy etc.) and give you an attribute that records the outcome, maybe pvp_stats_differ=yes if they do and undefined if they don't (or some such). Do you want that? mendel 08:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC) :I changed it to pvp_progression_0_effect and stuff like you suggested, it's probably better that way anyways. It still doesn't work here tho. But anyway, I put in the input pvp_stats to determine whether or not there are differing stats. If the stats are different in any way, the person is supposed to put some value in for pvp_stats. If there are no differing ones for pvp, you don't input anything and then it will junk the second line --Gimmethegepgun 18:53, 29 May 2008 (UTC) :: Ok, I'll see how it works. I am thinking that the skill data will stay separate (the way it is now) but that we can make some pages where they will show together, but we'll see how that turns out. I'm going to get to work tonight refining my stuff. Let's see what it looks liek in a few hours. mendel 21:59, 29 May 2008 (UTC) :::Well, finally finished this massive revision, all in the name of prettiness :/ Baffles my mind why I was forced to set the display style equal to null to make it work right because block didn't work... gonna go lie down and/or play my PS2 now, my head hurts >.< --Gimmethegepgun 22:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC) It turns out the pvp_stats_differ idea won't fly, for technical reasons, sorry. What you can probably (haven't tested that yet) do is to use this: * } } } } } } } } | } } } } } } } } |skill boxes look the same|skill boxes look different }} I'm seeing the progression data now, I will make the the empty progression rows go away, and everything else that doesn't work is likely because your pvp attributes are not yet using the prefix (e.g. req_pvp doesn't work, pvp_req does, and since it's concise_description, it needs to be pvp_concise_description). mendel 09:30, 30 May 2008 (UTC) I think my end is bug-free now. I hope I'm right. ;-) mendel 11:13, 30 May 2008 (UTC) :I think that stuff above could work, though it would need one HUGE touch, and I might do it something like this: or } or } or } or } or } or } or } or }}}}}|junk the pvp line|keep the pvp line}} :Basically the above junk outputs an #ifexpr: that junks the pvp line if the descriptions are the SAME or if there is NOTHING input for pvp stat stuff, and keeps the line if the pvp stats differ from the normal ones and ARE actually input. /phew, that took a while to work out in there :/ --Gimmethegepgun 19:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC) :: What is a HUGE touch? Your code takes longer to run because of the or, and if all you want to check for is if it's a pve/pvp skill, do |put pvp stuff in}} where it says skill boxes look different above. I'm probably too tired to follow what you tried to do with your sandbox. We'll see. I'm going to try to move my skillbox data into Templates now, we'll see how long it lasts with the trigger-happy admins. I/we can use any skill for testing then. mendel 22:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC) M.mendel's implementation